32 percent rise

65k a year isn't that much really when you think they are responsible for making decisions that effect everyone living in the UK. It's about 25k more than I get and I have much less responsibility.
So in terms of the job I could see them getting about 100k a year, something along the lines of a college principal. Have the UK people recruited the right people to the jobs, that's another question. Is the pool of people to pick from any good?
Should they in these times of cuts and pay freezes vote themselves a pay rise? Not in my opinion. We used to be on an annual increment rise and a cost of living raise. This has been frozen for the past 3 years until we got a .7% cost of living raise this year. We now also have to "bid" for a one off payment or the increment point raise. There is a limited budget for this so not everyone will get the money. I am at the top of my scale and couldn't be bothered to write two pages on why I should get a £500 payment. I would have probably got it but there are people in my team who get paid a lot less and I helped them write their bids instead.

65k a year isn't that much really when you think they are responsible for making decisions that effect everyone living in the UK. It's about 25k more than I get and I have much less responsibility.

So in terms of the job I could see them getting about 100k a year, something along the lines of a college principal. Have the UK people recruited the right people to the jobs, that's another question. Is the pool of people to pick from any good?

Should they in these times of cuts and pay freezes vote themselves a pay rise? Not in my opinion. We used to be on an annual increment rise and a cost of living raise. This has been frozen for the past 3 years until we got a .7% cost of living raise this year. We now also have to "bid" for a one off payment or the increment point raise. There is a limited budget for this so not everyone will get the money. I am at the top of my scale and couldn't be bothered to write two pages on why I should get a £500 payment. I would have probably got it but there are people in my team who get paid a lot less and I helped them write their bids instead.

I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together" If that is the case why don,t they lead by example. "Yeh" I would like a 32% pay rise. But if my bosses gave me a rise of that amount. We would price ourselves out of the market...

I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together" If that is the case why don,t they lead by example. "Yeh" I would like a 32% pay rise. But if my bosses gave me a rise of that amount. We would price ourselves out of the market...

As a member of the Armed Forces, I would like to point out to the MP's that 'We' haven't had a pay rise for the past 3 years and next year we get a whopping 1%..............................If we complain, we are told "If you don't like it, put your notice in and leave". The armed forces are 'instruments of the government' so maybe, they should link their pay rises to ours?
Andy

As a member of the Armed Forces, I would like to point out to the MP's that 'We' haven't had a pay rise for the past 3 years and next year we get a whopping 1%..............................If we complain, we are told "If you don't like it, put your notice in and leave". The armed forces are 'instruments of the government' so maybe, they should link their pay rises to ours?

I would like to know why when it is considered that a cap of £26,000 be placed on benefit income indicates that one needs £26,000 on which to live, why is the basic state pension only £105.00 per week? Do pensioners not have to live also?
One has to remember that when receiving the £26,000 there is no council tax to pay, no dental bills etc. the senior citizens have to pay these out of their pensions. Remember not everybody is in receipt of pension credit, but that only raises the state pension to about £140 something, I don't know the exact amount as i don't get it.
So life is never fair, but then again, who ever said that it would be?

I would like to know why when it is considered that a cap of £26,000 be placed on benefit income indicates that one needs £26,000 on which to live, why is the basic state pension only £105.00 per week? Do pensioners not have to live also?

One has to remember that when receiving the £26,000 there is no council tax to pay, no dental bills etc. the senior citizens have to pay these out of their pensions. Remember not everybody is in receipt of pension credit, but that only raises the state pension to about £140 something, I don't know the exact amount as i don't get it.

So life is never fair, but then again, who ever said that it would be?

[quote]65k a year isn't that much really when you think they are responsible for making decisions that effect everyone living in the UK.[/quote]
That may be true but consider this - the don't make those decisions individually but collectively and most of the work itself has actually been done by civil servants or appointed experts.
Perhaps the MPs should actually get 1/650 of whatever they consider to be the "correct" rate?
;)

Quote:65k a year isn't that much really when you think they are responsible for making decisions that effect everyone living in the UK.

That may be true but consider this - the don't make those decisions individually but collectively and most of the work itself has actually been done by civil servants or appointed experts.

Perhaps the MPs should actually get 1/650 of whatever they consider to be the "correct" rate?

To the vast majority 65k is a vast sum - especially given that we also pay for their housing costs, and it seems, even their food.
There is an adage - pay those at the bottom the leat you can get away with, pay those at the top the most - that you can get away with.....

To the vast majority 65k is a vast sum - especially given that we also pay for their housing costs, and it seems, even their food.

There is an adage - pay those at the bottom the leat you can get away with, pay those at the top the most - that you can get away with.....

I've been retired for a good many years but when I was in work it was the case that if you thought your employer was paying you too little you looked for another job that paid better and competed for it against others in the same situation.
Why do MPs think they should be any different?
Could it be that they know they are not competent to do another job which pays more in a competitive market?
Anyway, since we all pay their wages via our taxes shouldn't we have the deciding vote on how much they get? (now that would be a referendum that everyone would vote in! :D )

I've been retired for a good many years but when I was in work it was the case that if you thought your employer was paying you too little you looked for another job that paid better and competed for it against others in the same situation.

Why do MPs think they should be any different?

Could it be that they know they are not competent to do another job which pays more in a competitive market?

Anyway, since we all pay their wages via our taxes shouldn't we have the deciding vote on how much they get? (now that would be a referendum that everyone would vote in! )

[quote]
I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"
[/quote]
I don't quite see what Cameron has to do with this as its an across party move by all MPs, not just the "Nasty Tory Party".
If by all in it together one means MPs and "Pigs at the Trough" then yes, they are certainly all in it together, yet again showing their utter contempt for those of us foolish enough to elect them.

Quote:

I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"

I don't quite see what Cameron has to do with this as its an across party move by all MPs, not just the "Nasty Tory Party".

If by all in it together one means MPs and "Pigs at the Trough" then yes, they are certainly all in it together, yet again showing their utter contempt for those of us foolish enough to elect them.

A member of the House of Lords hasjust come up with one of the best suggestions ever. During a debate about food wastage, she suggested that if food were a lot more expensive, the people would be less inclined to waste it.
In our household, very little food is wasted because my wife and I were brought up just after the war. Rationing was yet to finish and poor families like ours had to struggle to put enough food on the table.
Marie Antoinette paid a very high price for her "let them eat cake" remark. It seems that both Houses of Parliament are equally out of touch.
As a child, I was able to walk along Downing Street, say "hello" to the officer standing outside No 10 and get a cheery reply. Now that the PM and Chancellor live behind iron gates and armed guards in a sort of "forbidden city", our leaders have just lost touch with the common people.

A member of the House of Lords hasjust come up with one of the best suggestions ever. During a debate about food wastage, she suggested that if food were a lot more expensive, the people would be less inclined to waste it.

In our household, very little food is wasted because my wife and I were brought up just after the war. Rationing was yet to finish and poor families like ours had to struggle to put enough food on the table.

Marie Antoinette paid a very high price for her "let them eat cake" remark. It seems that both Houses of Parliament are equally out of touch.

As a child, I was able to walk along Downing Street, say "hello" to the officer standing outside No 10 and get a cheery reply. Now that the PM and Chancellor live behind iron gates and armed guards in a sort of "forbidden city", our leaders have just lost touch with the common people.

According to this [link=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/10/mps-call-pay-rise-survey][u]article[/u][/link] it was an IPSA survey. However the actual increase will be 1% which is in line with other public servants.
[i]"The survey, which politicians completed anonymously, found that 69% thought they were underpaid on £65,738. The average level suggested for the salary was £86,250. Tories said their salary should be £96,740, while Lib Dems thought the right amount was £78,361 and Labour £77,322. Other parties put the figure at £75,091 with a fifth of those questioned saying they should be paid £95,000 or more."[/i]

According to this article it was an IPSA survey. However the actual increase will be 1% which is in line with other public servants.

"The survey, which politicians completed anonymously, found that 69% thought they were underpaid on £65,738. The average level suggested for the salary was £86,250. Tories said their salary should be £96,740, while Lib Dems thought the right amount was £78,361 and Labour £77,322. Other parties put the figure at £75,091 with a fifth of those questioned saying they should be paid £95,000 or more."

[quote]I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"
I don't quite see what Cameron has to do with this as its an across party move by all MPs, not just the "Nasty Tory Party".
If by all in it together one means MPs and "Pigs at the Trough" then yes, they are certainly all in it together, yet again showing their utter contempt for those of us foolish enough to elect them.[/quote][quote]I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"
This is how it came across to me when he said it. I got the impression he meant everyone not just the ordinary working man. But PM,s and the well off too.

Quote:I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"

I don't quite see what Cameron has to do with this as its an across party move by all MPs, not just the "Nasty Tory Party".

If by all in it together one means MPs and "Pigs at the Trough" then yes, they are certainly all in it together, yet again showing their utter contempt for those of us foolish enough to elect them.

Quote:I thought Cameron said."We are all in this together"
This is how it came across to me when he said it. I got the impression he meant everyone not just the ordinary working man. But PM,s and the well off too.

It is not a 'cross-party move' or any sort of move. MPs no longer have the power to set their own salaries and expense limits. That is done by IPSA.
IPSA is very much disliked by MPs.............. [i]that[/i] is certainly cross-party! ;)

It is not a 'cross-party move' or any sort of move. MPs no longer have the power to set their own salaries and expense limits. That is done by IPSA.

IPSA is very much disliked by MPs.............. that is certainly cross-party!

[quote]The survey, which politicians completed anonymously, found that 69% thought they were underpaid
is cross-party, the decision whether to implement it isn't[/quote]
Strange that some think they are not under paid.
If they did a survey in our place. You would get 100% say we are under paid. More so the skilled workers. As daft as it sounds the production workers get more than the skilled workers who make the tooling for the machines and the maintenance who repair them ?.

Quote:The survey, which politicians completed anonymously, found that 69% thought they were underpaid

is cross-party, the decision whether to implement it isn't

Strange that some think they are not under paid.
If they did a survey in our place. You would get 100% say we are under paid. More so the skilled workers. As daft as it sounds the production workers get more than the skilled workers who make the tooling for the machines and the maintenance who repair them ?.